Utopia Unreachable: The Consequences of Perfect Societies - Essay Sample

Introduction

The attractiveness of a utopia, a perfect society, can cause many communities to attempt to create the impossible fantasy. Although the idea of a paradise sounds welcoming, there are many consequences that outweigh the benefits. Intelligence, freedom, and human experiences, all part of the excitement of being human, will vanish with the flatness of a perfect society. Utopia is unreachable, but it is the process, the will of improving cultures that are important and admirable.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

Practice and trials are the only way to test if a perfect society works or not, and the failure of countless ancestors has proven to us that it cannot exist because human beings have desires. Moreover, the creators of an idealistic community do not believe it is possible, or at least never thought it is likely to accomplish with its perfectly portrayed influence.

In the mid-19th century groups of men and women in North America and other parts of Europe saw the creating of groups as part of social progress (Clark, 1995). This century experienced an industrial revolution which brought a lot of wealth and this later led to social unrests.

The rich enjoyed the luxuries of revolution but the working class got depressed. They, therefore, formed a utopia, a new organization which would be free from modern abuse of the society. A utopian society is unreachable, but it is the process and the will of improving that is important and admirable. The following are the reasons as to why the utopia societies failed.

The Brook Farm, a small socialist utopia society, offered equal compensation, free education, and free medical attendance. This was also the case with Northampton Association, formed by social reformers William Benson and David Mack. The utopian societies could not exist all by themselves. They could not sufficiently work on their own financially and they were therefore on constant dealing with the capitalist world (Hillquit, 1971). These cooperative communities were discontented financially because they would not compete with the capitalists. For instance, the school that was owned by the Brook Farm brought in steady income but other activities did not. This income would not be enough to sustain the community and they later sunk in poverty.

The Brook Farm failed because people were tired of their farming jobs. An example is given of Hawthorne who left the community because he was tired of shoveling manure for a number of years (Noyes, 1961). The Northampton Association, also failed because it received a large number of people but it would not accommodate them all. In addition, these new people found it hard to adjust to the communal way of living

The process of bringing people together and making them believe in humanitarian ideas was far much good. This entire process was good because the social reformers believed that this was the only way to solve the modern abuses of civilization such as racism and economic depression. These communities were in pursuit of harmony and happiness which never existed in the capitalist system. Even though this system failed, the spirit and principles did not fail (Noyes, 1961). These principles have been continuously adapted by today's world. For example, the spirit of goodwill, charity, and equality, among inhabitants of different cities in the United States of America. The society after this period is better than the previous one.

References

Clark, Christopher. The Communitarian Moment: The Radical Challenge of the NorthamptonAssociation. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1995.

Clark, Christopher and Kerry W. Buckley, eds. Letters From an American Utopia: The Stetson Family and the Northampton Association, 1843-1847. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 2004.

Hill quit, Morris. History of Socialism in the United States. New York: Dover Publications, Inc., 1971.

Noyes, John Humphrey. History of American Socialisms. New York: Hillary House Publishers, LTD., 1961